Remember me
▼ Content

The Sun II


The Sun II07-09-2018 13:02
James___
★★★☆☆
(736)
..@All,
..The Holy Link is to an image that shows how CO2 is related to ice ages. There are 3 black lines. The first is by the warming at the end of the last ice age. The other 2 are ate 110,000 and 220,000 years ago which were the end of the warm periods.
...It is supposed to demonstrate that CO2 levels and global temperatures parallel each other. The graph clearly shows that our planet was cooling down while CO2 levels stayed elevated.
..And even with this current warming period it seems that CO2 levels kept elevating while the temperature has lagged behind.

https://photos.app.goo.gl/XnHPcJ72Unu7eeAn9
07-09-2018 15:39
Into the Night
★★★★★
(5875)
James___ wrote:
..@All,
..The Holy Link is to an image that shows how CO2 is related to ice ages.

I deleted your Holy Link again. Learn to think for yourself instead of just using the arguments of others.
James___ wrote:
...It is supposed to demonstrate that CO2 levels and global temperatures parallel each other. The graph clearly shows that our planet was cooling down while CO2 levels stayed elevated.
..And even with this current warming period it seems that CO2 levels kept elevating while the temperature has lagged behind.

It is not possible to measure the temperature of the Earth. It is not possible to measure the global atmospheric CO2 content. You are denying mathematics again.


The Parrot Killer
07-09-2018 17:08
James___
★★★☆☆
(736)
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
..@All,
..The Holy Link is to an image that shows how CO2 is related to ice ages.

I deleted your Holy Link again. Learn to think for yourself instead of just using the arguments of others.
James___ wrote:
...It is supposed to demonstrate that CO2 levels and global temperatures parallel each other. The graph clearly shows that our planet was cooling down while CO2 levels stayed elevated.
..And even with this current warming period it seems that CO2 levels kept elevating while the temperature has lagged behind.

It is not possible to measure the temperature of the Earth. It is not possible to measure the global atmospheric CO2 content. You are denying mathematics again.



...Just more of your hate.
07-09-2018 17:57
James___
★★★☆☆
(736)
@GasGuzzler, maybe you might rethink who itn is. The link (http://www.global-greenhouse-warming.com/ice-ages-and-sea-levels.html) is to the website the graph came from.
They say;
It is known that changes in earth's temperature are highly correlated with concentrations of atmospheric C02, with higher C02 levels being commensurate with warmer temperatures, as are ice ages and sea levels


..Their own graphs (in the 1st post) say otherwise. Significant cooling happens even with high levels of CO2. And itn will say it can't be measured, holy link, think for yourself, etc.
Edited on 07-09-2018 17:58
07-09-2018 20:49
Into the Night
★★★★★
(5875)
James___ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
..@All,
..The Holy Link is to an image that shows how CO2 is related to ice ages.

I deleted your Holy Link again. Learn to think for yourself instead of just using the arguments of others.
James___ wrote:
...It is supposed to demonstrate that CO2 levels and global temperatures parallel each other. The graph clearly shows that our planet was cooling down while CO2 levels stayed elevated.
..And even with this current warming period it seems that CO2 levels kept elevating while the temperature has lagged behind.

It is not possible to measure the temperature of the Earth. It is not possible to measure the global atmospheric CO2 content. You are denying mathematics again.



...Just more of your hate.

Paranoid.


The Parrot Killer
07-09-2018 20:53
Into the Night
★★★★★
(5875)
James___ wrote:
@GasGuzzler, maybe you might rethink who itn is.

He already knows. He has already seen you melt down like this before too.
James___ wrote:
...deleted redundant graph...
They say;
It is known that changes in earth's temperature are highly correlated with concentrations of atmospheric C02, with higher C02 levels being commensurate with warmer temperatures, as are ice ages and sea levels


..Their own graphs (in the 1st post) say otherwise. Significant cooling happens even with high levels of CO2. And itn will say it can't be measured, holy link, think for yourself, etc.


You are just speculating. It is not possible to measure the temperature of the Earth. You are correct in that CO2 has no affect on the temperature of the Earth.


The Parrot Killer
09-09-2018 01:25
James___
★★★☆☆
(736)
...@GasGuzzler, in the graph, notice the sudden drop in temperature but not in CO2 at about 320,000 and 410,000 years ago ? Yet most people will say they said it supports co2 causes global warming. And that's what they argue about. What's not being said is that Antarctica warms during an ice age in the northern hemisphere. So right now Antarctica is about 8° C. colder than when we have an ice age. It's temperature swing will be about 1/2 that of the Arctic, Greenland or Vostok (East in Russian). Что делаю теперь ? Я не знаю. Я буду думать на его. Yep, what to do now ? After all, we'd need to learn how to regulate the Arctic's temperature to avoid the next ice age. I think in the next couple of thousand years they'll probably figure out how to do that. Nuclear powered drills and cooling systems. Правилно? Really. And yes I am an American. Learning a foreign language can be a challenge and a decent way to meet people. I am also trying to get more into wood working. Have a historical project that I'm working on.
..As for all of the co2 that you're dumping into the atmosphere, if you can afford it then I guess that's your business.
..And this is where itn will start humping my leg again because that's what he does. It's a simile and not a phallusy.

..

https://photos.app.goo.gl/tuJ1uHm4wWdhNv1z8
Edited on 09-09-2018 01:38
09-09-2018 02:33
James___
★★★☆☆
(736)
p.s., up to 40% of the U.S. agricultural production is at risk because of depleted aquifers west of the Mississippi river. Nebraska is holding on but is water from the bedrock below Iowa responsible for that ? And that's the problem that the U.S. should be discussing. As seen in other parts of the world lakes can be drained. Kind of why thinking of the Great Lakes as a source of fresh water might be an environmental disaster waiting to happen. And we also have to consider how that could effect Canada because lower lake levels would hurt every city on the Great Lakes. Sometimes it's better to maintain what we have.
11-09-2018 00:21
James___
★★★☆☆
(736)
The link is to an image taken in Senja, Norway. In the reflection on the water you can see many stars even though the Sun is still up. Just an interesting picture.
https://www.facebook.com/visitsenja/photos/a.1682399822086440/2213802288946188/?type=3
11-09-2018 00:54
Into the Night
★★★★★
(5875)
James___ wrote:
The link is to an image taken in Senja, Norway. In the reflection on the water you can see many stars even though the Sun is still up. Just an interesting picture.
https://www.facebook.com/visitsenja/photos/a.1682399822086440/2213802288946188/?type=3


Quite pretty.


The Parrot Killer
11-09-2018 23:02
James___
★★★☆☆
(736)
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
The link is to an image taken in Senja, Norway. In the reflection on the water you can see many stars even though the Sun is still up. Just an interesting picture.
https://www.facebook.com/visitsenja/photos/a.1682399822086440/2213802288946188/?type=3


Quite pretty.


..Thanks. That's something Gamul1 can think about. Since he has to wait to see if he'll be able to go somewhere to see the borealis in person then he might check out visit Senja (pronounced Senya). It is interesting that most people just consider that the borealis "is" and don't worry about the science behind it. I think if people thought about the science then they wouldn't appreciate their beauty.
..Although I do wonder sometimes if the Vikings were influenced by the borealis and that they were close to Valhalla. I know that there are those that believe that everything has a spirit. The movie Avatar used that belief as Gaia or Qi (chi).
Edited on 11-09-2018 23:08
12-09-2018 07:37
Into the Night
★★★★★
(5875)
James___ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
The link is to an image taken in Senja, Norway. In the reflection on the water you can see many stars even though the Sun is still up. Just an interesting picture.
https://www.facebook.com/visitsenja/photos/a.1682399822086440/2213802288946188/?type=3


Quite pretty.


..Thanks. That's something Gamul1 can think about. Since he has to wait to see if he'll be able to go somewhere to see the borealis in person then he might check out visit Senja (pronounced Senya). It is interesting that most people just consider that the borealis "is" and don't worry about the science behind it. I think if people thought about the science then they wouldn't appreciate their beauty.
..Although I do wonder sometimes if the Vikings were influenced by the borealis and that they were close to Valhalla. I know that there are those that believe that everything has a spirit. The movie Avatar used that belief as Gaia or Qi (chi).


They probably were. They certainly sailed within range of them, and out at sea they are especially visible.

Yes. There a LOT of people that believe that most everything has a spirit. That religion is the same as Shinto, but is also believed by many other cultures than in the Far East, including many American Indian tribes and several cultures in Europe.

It is true you can appreciate the Auroras by themselves just as they are, but I find knowing the science behind them only makes them more beautiful.


The Parrot Killer
12-09-2018 13:20
James___
★★★☆☆
(736)
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
The link is to an image taken in Senja, Norway. In the reflection on the water you can see many stars even though the Sun is still up. Just an interesting picture.
https://www.facebook.com/visitsenja/photos/a.1682399822086440/2213802288946188/?type=3


Quite pretty.


..Thanks. That's something Gamul1 can think about. Since he has to wait to see if he'll be able to go somewhere to see the borealis in person then he might check out visit Senja (pronounced Senya). It is interesting that most people just consider that the borealis "is" and don't worry about the science behind it. I think if people thought about the science then they wouldn't appreciate their beauty.
..Although I do wonder sometimes if the Vikings were influenced by the borealis and that they were close to Valhalla. I know that there are those that believe that everything has a spirit. The movie Avatar used that belief as Gaia or Qi (chi).


They probably were. They certainly sailed within range of them, and out at sea they are especially visible.

Yes. There a LOT of people that believe that most everything has a spirit. That religion is the same as Shinto, but is also believed by many other cultures than in the Far East, including many American Indian tribes and several cultures in Europe.

It is true you can appreciate the Auroras by themselves just as they are, but I find knowing the science behind them only makes them more beautiful.



..Sometimes it's funny to listen to a scientist try to explain where matter came from. The usual response is an alternate universe. What was funny was when I asked some guys I knew who lived in Cairo, Egypt and not Cairo, Indiana where we're going to be in 4,000 years. I pointed out to them the the pyramids were built 4,000 years ago so. They hadn't ever thought about that.
12-09-2018 17:18
Into the Night
★★★★★
(5875)
James___ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
The link is to an image taken in Senja, Norway. In the reflection on the water you can see many stars even though the Sun is still up. Just an interesting picture.
https://www.facebook.com/visitsenja/photos/a.1682399822086440/2213802288946188/?type=3


Quite pretty.


..Thanks. That's something Gamul1 can think about. Since he has to wait to see if he'll be able to go somewhere to see the borealis in person then he might check out visit Senja (pronounced Senya). It is interesting that most people just consider that the borealis "is" and don't worry about the science behind it. I think if people thought about the science then they wouldn't appreciate their beauty.
..Although I do wonder sometimes if the Vikings were influenced by the borealis and that they were close to Valhalla. I know that there are those that believe that everything has a spirit. The movie Avatar used that belief as Gaia or Qi (chi).


They probably were. They certainly sailed within range of them, and out at sea they are especially visible.

Yes. There a LOT of people that believe that most everything has a spirit. That religion is the same as Shinto, but is also believed by many other cultures than in the Far East, including many American Indian tribes and several cultures in Europe.

It is true you can appreciate the Auroras by themselves just as they are, but I find knowing the science behind them only makes them more beautiful.



..Sometimes it's funny to listen to a scientist try to explain where matter came from. The usual response is an alternate universe. What was funny was when I asked some guys I knew who lived in Cairo, Egypt and not Cairo, Indiana where we're going to be in 4,000 years. I pointed out to them the the pyramids were built 4,000 years ago so. They hadn't ever thought about that.


Matter doesn't 'come' from anywhere. Like energy, it can be neither created nor destroyed, but it can be changed.

Yeah, it's kind of odd the attitude about the pyramids in Egypt these days. They just aren't into that stuff so much anymore. Most are Islamic now, and they also have a fair sized Christian population. They just don't worship the Ra anymore. They really haven't since the Roman empire came to Egypt. The whole bit with the pyramids centered around Ra.

Today, the pyramids are a tourist attraction, and the old temples and such to the various gods centered around Ra are in ruins (but still several are tourist attractions), and even whole cities of old have been abandoned. Some have been swallowed by the constantly moving desert sands.

Where will civilization be in 4000 years? Who knows? Probably nothing like it is today!


The Parrot Killer
14-09-2018 21:20
Tim the plumber
★★★★☆
(1250)
James___ wrote:
..Sometimes it's funny to listen to a scientist try to explain where matter came from. The usual response is an alternate universe. What was funny was when I asked some guys I knew who lived in Cairo, Egypt and not Cairo, Indiana where we're going to be in 4,000 years. I pointed out to them the the pyramids were built 4,000 years ago so. They hadn't ever thought about that.


?????

Matter is a form of stored energy.

If you count potential energy due to gravity as negative, that is the notional point of the top of the univers's gravity well being zero, then there is a sum total of zero energy in the universe appart from the energy required to make space time.
18-09-2018 00:58
James___
★★★☆☆
(736)
Tim the plumber wrote:
James___ wrote:
..Sometimes it's funny to listen to a scientist try to explain where matter came from. The usual response is an alternate universe. What was funny was when I asked some guys I knew who lived in Cairo, Egypt and not Cairo, Indiana where we're going to be in 4,000 years. I pointed out to them the the pyramids were built 4,000 years ago so. They hadn't ever thought about that.


?????

Matter is a form of stored energy.

If you count potential energy due to gravity as negative, that is the notional point of the top of the universe's gravity well being zero, then there is a sum total of zero energy in the universe apart from the energy required to make space time.



...It is possible that you gave people a brain cramp with your reply. With what you say then E = hv. This then could describe dark matter as being
KE = Ke - (E = hv). Just not sure if they're ready for it.
18-09-2018 20:46
Tim the plumber
★★★★☆
(1250)
James___ wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
James___ wrote:
..Sometimes it's funny to listen to a scientist try to explain where matter came from. The usual response is an alternate universe. What was funny was when I asked some guys I knew who lived in Cairo, Egypt and not Cairo, Indiana where we're going to be in 4,000 years. I pointed out to them the the pyramids were built 4,000 years ago so. They hadn't ever thought about that.


?????

Matter is a form of stored energy.

If you count potential energy due to gravity as negative, that is the notional point of the top of the universe's gravity well being zero, then there is a sum total of zero energy in the universe apart from the energy required to make space time.



...It is possible that you gave people a brain cramp with your reply. With what you say then E = hv. This then could describe dark matter as being
KE = Ke - (E = hv). Just not sure if they're ready for it.


Er...............

Potential energy due to gravity (change) is equal to mgh, in my schooling.

h being height

m mass

g gravity.

What is h and v in yours? And what is the difference between KE and Ke????
18-09-2018 22:54
James___
★★★☆☆
(736)
Tim the plumber wrote:
James___ wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
James___ wrote:
..Sometimes it's funny to listen to a scientist try to explain where matter came from. The usual response is an alternate universe. What was funny was when I asked some guys I knew who lived in Cairo, Egypt and not Cairo, Indiana where we're going to be in 4,000 years. I pointed out to them the the pyramids were built 4,000 years ago so. They hadn't ever thought about that.


?????

Matter is a form of stored energy.

If you count potential energy due to gravity as negative, that is the notional point of the top of the universe's gravity well being zero, then there is a sum total of zero energy in the universe apart from the energy required to make space time.



...It is possible that you gave people a brain cramp with your reply. With what you say then E = hv. This then could describe dark matter as being
KE = Ke - (E = hv). Just not sure if they're ready for it.


Er...............

Potential energy due to gravity (change) is equal to mgh, in my schooling.

h being height

m mass

g gravity.

What is h and v in yours? And what is the difference between KE and Ke????



...I was considering how dark matter might be quantified. While it's acknowledged to exist and exert force it essentially has no value associated with it. Yet for it to influence the spin of a galaxy it would need to have KE of it's own. Otherwise spiral galaxies wouldn't form, right ? So what I posted isn't something that you're considering.
21-09-2018 14:26
Tim the plumber
★★★★☆
(1250)
James___ wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
James___ wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
James___ wrote:
..Sometimes it's funny to listen to a scientist try to explain where matter came from. The usual response is an alternate universe. What was funny was when I asked some guys I knew who lived in Cairo, Egypt and not Cairo, Indiana where we're going to be in 4,000 years. I pointed out to them the the pyramids were built 4,000 years ago so. They hadn't ever thought about that.


?????

Matter is a form of stored energy.

If you count potential energy due to gravity as negative, that is the notional point of the top of the universe's gravity well being zero, then there is a sum total of zero energy in the universe apart from the energy required to make space time.



...It is possible that you gave people a brain cramp with your reply. With what you say then E = hv. This then could describe dark matter as being
KE = Ke - (E = hv). Just not sure if they're ready for it.


Er...............

Potential energy due to gravity (change) is equal to mgh, in my schooling.

h being height

m mass

g gravity.

What is h and v in yours? And what is the difference between KE and Ke????



...I was considering how dark matter might be quantified. While it's acknowledged to exist and exert force it essentially has no value associated with it. Yet for it to influence the spin of a galaxy it would need to have KE of it's own. Otherwise spiral galaxies wouldn't form, right ? So what I posted isn't something that you're considering.


As far as it is understood, dark matter is stuff with mass but no interaction with "normal" matter, so no strong or weak subatomic forces, no electrical or magnetic properties. So it is floating mass with no other characteristics. Thus yes it will have KE and PE in the normal way. Just does not stop when it passes through a planet and flies out the other side.
21-09-2018 14:44
James___
★★★☆☆
(736)
Tim the plumber wrote:


As far as it is understood, dark matter is stuff with mass but no interaction with "normal" matter, so no strong or weak subatomic forces, no electrical or magnetic properties. So it is floating mass with no other characteristics. Thus yes it will have KE and PE in the normal way. Just does not stop when it passes through a planet and flies out the other side.



...And yet it influences how a galaxy rotates because...

Until now, he says, dark matter is only known by its gravitational interactions with ordinary matter.
https://cosmosmagazine.com/space/dark-matter-may-carry-electrical-charge
21-09-2018 18:19
Into the Night
★★★★★
(5875)
Tim the plumber wrote:
James___ wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
James___ wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
James___ wrote:
..Sometimes it's funny to listen to a scientist try to explain where matter came from. The usual response is an alternate universe. What was funny was when I asked some guys I knew who lived in Cairo, Egypt and not Cairo, Indiana where we're going to be in 4,000 years. I pointed out to them the the pyramids were built 4,000 years ago so. They hadn't ever thought about that.


?????

Matter is a form of stored energy.

If you count potential energy due to gravity as negative, that is the notional point of the top of the universe's gravity well being zero, then there is a sum total of zero energy in the universe apart from the energy required to make space time.



...It is possible that you gave people a brain cramp with your reply. With what you say then E = hv. This then could describe dark matter as being
KE = Ke - (E = hv). Just not sure if they're ready for it.


Er...............

Potential energy due to gravity (change) is equal to mgh, in my schooling.

h being height

m mass

g gravity.

What is h and v in yours? And what is the difference between KE and Ke????



...I was considering how dark matter might be quantified. While it's acknowledged to exist and exert force it essentially has no value associated with it. Yet for it to influence the spin of a galaxy it would need to have KE of it's own. Otherwise spiral galaxies wouldn't form, right ? So what I posted isn't something that you're considering.


As far as it is understood, dark matter is stuff with mass but no interaction with "normal" matter, so no strong or weak subatomic forces, no electrical or magnetic properties. So it is floating mass with no other characteristics. Thus yes it will have KE and PE in the normal way. Just does not stop when it passes through a planet and flies out the other side.

Then it is not mass.


The Parrot Killer
21-09-2018 18:21
Into the Night
★★★★★
(5875)
James___ wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:


As far as it is understood, dark matter is stuff with mass but no interaction with "normal" matter, so no strong or weak subatomic forces, no electrical or magnetic properties. So it is floating mass with no other characteristics. Thus yes it will have KE and PE in the normal way. Just does not stop when it passes through a planet and flies out the other side.



...And yet it influences how a galaxy rotates because...

Until now, he says, dark matter is only known by its gravitational interactions with ordinary matter.
https://cosmosmagazine.com/space/dark-matter-may-carry-electrical-charge


You might want want to read up on angular momentum and how it interacts with linear momentum.


The Parrot Killer
21-09-2018 22:44
James___
★★★☆☆
(736)
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:


As far as it is understood, dark matter is stuff with mass but no interaction with "normal" matter, so no strong or weak subatomic forces, no electrical or magnetic properties. So it is floating mass with no other characteristics. Thus yes it will have KE and PE in the normal way. Just does not stop when it passes through a planet and flies out the other side.



...And yet it influences how a galaxy rotates because...

Until now, he says, dark matter is only known by its gravitational interactions with ordinary matter.
https://cosmosmagazine.com/space/dark-matter-may-carry-electrical-charge


You might want want to read up on angular momentum and how it interacts with linear momentum.



...When make such a request of another individual a frame of reference needs to be given. Without such framework then the context cannot be known. This then would render any answer meaningless and then it could be construed as a circular argument using buzzwords. Then someone might consider such a response a fallacy. And we don't want that do we ? We don't. This is why you will need to rephrase your request and will include frames of reference so that your query might be properly understood.
Edited on 21-09-2018 22:45
21-09-2018 23:34
Into the Night
★★★★★
(5875)
James___ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:


As far as it is understood, dark matter is stuff with mass but no interaction with "normal" matter, so no strong or weak subatomic forces, no electrical or magnetic properties. So it is floating mass with no other characteristics. Thus yes it will have KE and PE in the normal way. Just does not stop when it passes through a planet and flies out the other side.



...And yet it influences how a galaxy rotates because...

Until now, he says, dark matter is only known by its gravitational interactions with ordinary matter.
https://cosmosmagazine.com/space/dark-matter-may-carry-electrical-charge


You might want want to read up on angular momentum and how it interacts with linear momentum.



...When make such a request of another individual a frame of reference needs to be given. Without such framework then the context cannot be known. This then would render any answer meaningless and then it could be construed as a circular argument using buzzwords. Then someone might consider such a response a fallacy. And we don't want that do we ? We don't. This is why you will need to rephrase your request and will include frames of reference so that your query might be properly understood.


They describe why a galaxy rotates, why you get tornadoes and hurricanes, why you get whirlpools in drains, and so on.


The Parrot Killer
22-09-2018 01:44
James___
★★★☆☆
(736)
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:


As far as it is understood, dark matter is stuff with mass but no interaction with "normal" matter, so no strong or weak subatomic forces, no electrical or magnetic properties. So it is floating mass with no other characteristics. Thus yes it will have KE and PE in the normal way. Just does not stop when it passes through a planet and flies out the other side.



...And yet it influences how a galaxy rotates because...

Until now, he says, dark matter is only known by its gravitational interactions with ordinary matter.
https://cosmosmagazine.com/space/dark-matter-may-carry-electrical-charge


You might want want to read up on angular momentum and how it interacts with linear momentum.



...When make such a request of another individual a frame of reference needs to be given. Without such framework then the context cannot be known. This then would render any answer meaningless and then it could be construed as a circular argument using buzzwords. Then someone might consider such a response a fallacy. And we don't want that do we ? We don't. This is why you will need to rephrase your request and will include frames of reference so that your query might be properly understood.


They describe why a galaxy rotates, why you get tornadoes and hurricanes, why you get whirlpools in drains, and so on.


...You didn't rephrase your query. Instead you used meaningless buzzwords to create a circular (angular) argument. Inversion Fallacy. We were trying to avoid this itn and you went straight (linear) to it.
..Now we have a relationship between linear and angular momentum. You took us directly into a circular argument. Work in this instance is the effort it takes to rationalize a thought using logic which cannot be falsified like science can.
..We know science can be falsified because Einstein's General Theory of Relativity falsified Newton's Theory of Gravity which is F = G * M1M2/r^2 of which a planets rotational force is dependent on it's gravity. Easily falsifiable. The same applies to why galaxies rotate. It would be the effect gravity has on matter but as we know, Einstein's GTR and not GNR (general theory vs. guns n roses) falsified it. This is why science is a fallacy and logic is not.
22-09-2018 02:40
James___
★★★☆☆
(736)
...In case you missed it itn, the gravitational effect is what causes galaxies and planets to rotate. And with planets, the Coriolis effect is what allows for hurricanes and tornadoes is because of the gravitational effect. I've already have said that Einstein's experiment of light from a distant star moving away from the Sun which was based on the precession of Mercury is because gravity has an angular potential to it. Everyone it seems only considers gravity's linear potential which on the Earth is 9.8 m/s. I think in this instance I used logic to demonstrate gravity's linear and angular potential.
..This in turn can influence the Earth's orbit around the Sun depending whether or not if we are experiencing an ice age because this would change the angular momentum of the Earth. If anyone considers how our planet cools over thousands of years, it will cool for a while and then warm some. This could be caused by how it's orbit is influenced by the Sun's gravitational field. This simply means that the linear and angular potential will alternately allow one to have greater influence.

https://goo.gl/images/BnovsS
Edited on 22-09-2018 03:08
22-09-2018 09:48
Into the Night
★★★★★
(5875)
James___ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:


As far as it is understood, dark matter is stuff with mass but no interaction with "normal" matter, so no strong or weak subatomic forces, no electrical or magnetic properties. So it is floating mass with no other characteristics. Thus yes it will have KE and PE in the normal way. Just does not stop when it passes through a planet and flies out the other side.



...And yet it influences how a galaxy rotates because...

Until now, he says, dark matter is only known by its gravitational interactions with ordinary matter.
https://cosmosmagazine.com/space/dark-matter-may-carry-electrical-charge


You might want want to read up on angular momentum and how it interacts with linear momentum.



...When make such a request of another individual a frame of reference needs to be given. Without such framework then the context cannot be known. This then would render any answer meaningless and then it could be construed as a circular argument using buzzwords. Then someone might consider such a response a fallacy. And we don't want that do we ? We don't. This is why you will need to rephrase your request and will include frames of reference so that your query might be properly understood.


They describe why a galaxy rotates, why you get tornadoes and hurricanes, why you get whirlpools in drains, and so on.


...You didn't rephrase your query.

No need to.
James___ wrote:
Instead you used meaningless buzzwords to create a circular (angular) argument. Inversion Fallacy. We were trying to avoid this itn and you went straight (linear) to it.

Angular momentum and linear momentum are not meaningless buzzwords. You obviously know nothing about them and don't want to learn.
James___ wrote:
..Now we have a relationship between linear and angular momentum. You took us directly into a circular argument. Work in this instance is the effort it takes to rationalize a thought using logic which cannot be falsified like science can.

Feeling angry are you? You aren't even making sense.
James___ wrote:
..We know science can be falsified because Einstein's General Theory of Relativity falsified Newton's Theory of Gravity which is F = G * M1M2/r^2
Newton never created a Theory of Gravity. There is no Theory of Gravity. The equation you gave is for Newton's Theory of Universal Gravitation. It has not been falsified.
James___ wrote:
of which a planets rotational force is dependent on it's gravity.
No, it isn't.
James___ wrote:
Easily falsifiable. The same applies to why galaxies rotate.
No, it doesn't.
James___ wrote:
It would be the effect gravity has on matter but as we know, Einstein's GTR and not GNR (general theory vs. guns n roses) falsified it. This is why science is a fallacy and logic is not.

Neither is a fallacy. Geez, when you get angry you really don't make any sense at all.


The Parrot Killer
22-09-2018 09:53
Into the Night
★★★★★
(5875)
James___ wrote:
...In case you missed it itn, the gravitational effect is what causes galaxies and planets to rotate.
No, it doesn't.
James___ wrote:
And with planets, the Coriolis effect is what allows for hurricanes and tornadoes is because of the gravitational effect.

The Coriolis effect is not caused by gravity. It does not cause hurricanes or tornadoes.
James___ wrote:
I've already have said that Einstein's experiment of light from a distant star moving away from the Sun which was based on the precession of Mercury is because gravity has an angular potential to it.

Gravity is not angular potential.
James___ wrote:
Everyone it seems only considers gravity's linear potential which on the Earth is 9.8 m/s. I think in this instance I used logic to demonstrate gravity's linear and angular potential.
Gravity is not linear potential either.
James___ wrote:
..This in turn can influence the Earth's orbit around the Sun depending whether or not if we are experiencing an ice age because this would change the angular momentum of the Earth.
The Sun does not change Earth's angular momentum.
James___ wrote:
If anyone considers how our planet cools over thousands of years, it will cool for a while and then warm some. This could be caused by how it's orbit is influenced by the Sun's gravitational field.

No, the Sun does not cause ice ages.
James___ wrote:
This simply means that the linear and angular potential will alternately allow one to have greater influence.

There is no such thing as linear or angular potential. There is no alternation. Neither one causes ice ages.


The Parrot Killer
22-09-2018 10:02
Tim the plumber
★★★★☆
(1250)
Into the Night wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
James___ wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
James___ wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
James___ wrote:
..Sometimes it's funny to listen to a scientist try to explain where matter came from. The usual response is an alternate universe. What was funny was when I asked some guys I knew who lived in Cairo, Egypt and not Cairo, Indiana where we're going to be in 4,000 years. I pointed out to them the the pyramids were built 4,000 years ago so. They hadn't ever thought about that.


?????

Matter is a form of stored energy.

If you count potential energy due to gravity as negative, that is the notional point of the top of the universe's gravity well being zero, then there is a sum total of zero energy in the universe apart from the energy required to make space time.



...It is possible that you gave people a brain cramp with your reply. With what you say then E = hv. This then could describe dark matter as being
KE = Ke - (E = hv). Just not sure if they're ready for it.


Er...............

Potential energy due to gravity (change) is equal to mgh, in my schooling.

h being height

m mass

g gravity.

What is h and v in yours? And what is the difference between KE and Ke????



...I was considering how dark matter might be quantified. While it's acknowledged to exist and exert force it essentially has no value associated with it. Yet for it to influence the spin of a galaxy it would need to have KE of it's own. Otherwise spiral galaxies wouldn't form, right ? So what I posted isn't something that you're considering.


As far as it is understood, dark matter is stuff with mass but no interaction with "normal" matter, so no strong or weak subatomic forces, no electrical or magnetic properties. So it is floating mass with no other characteristics. Thus yes it will have KE and PE in the normal way. Just does not stop when it passes through a planet and flies out the other side.

Then it is not mass.


Is mass but nothing else.

Not the sort of matter we are used to.
22-09-2018 20:43
Into the Night
★★★★★
(5875)
Tim the plumber wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
James___ wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
James___ wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
James___ wrote:
..Sometimes it's funny to listen to a scientist try to explain where matter came from. The usual response is an alternate universe. What was funny was when I asked some guys I knew who lived in Cairo, Egypt and not Cairo, Indiana where we're going to be in 4,000 years. I pointed out to them the the pyramids were built 4,000 years ago so. They hadn't ever thought about that.


?????

Matter is a form of stored energy.

If you count potential energy due to gravity as negative, that is the notional point of the top of the universe's gravity well being zero, then there is a sum total of zero energy in the universe apart from the energy required to make space time.



...It is possible that you gave people a brain cramp with your reply. With what you say then E = hv. This then could describe dark matter as being
KE = Ke - (E = hv). Just not sure if they're ready for it.


Er...............

Potential energy due to gravity (change) is equal to mgh, in my schooling.

h being height

m mass

g gravity.

What is h and v in yours? And what is the difference between KE and Ke????



...I was considering how dark matter might be quantified. While it's acknowledged to exist and exert force it essentially has no value associated with it. Yet for it to influence the spin of a galaxy it would need to have KE of it's own. Otherwise spiral galaxies wouldn't form, right ? So what I posted isn't something that you're considering.


As far as it is understood, dark matter is stuff with mass but no interaction with "normal" matter, so no strong or weak subatomic forces, no electrical or magnetic properties. So it is floating mass with no other characteristics. Thus yes it will have KE and PE in the normal way. Just does not stop when it passes through a planet and flies out the other side.

Then it is not mass.


Is mass but nothing else.

Not the sort of matter we are used to.


Really?? Have you ever been able to detect any?? How are you able to describe the characteristics of this 'mass'?


The Parrot Killer
Edited on 22-09-2018 20:44
23-09-2018 13:15
Tim the plumber
★★★★☆
(1250)
Into the Night wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
James___ wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
James___ wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
James___ wrote:
..Sometimes it's funny to listen to a scientist try to explain where matter came from. The usual response is an alternate universe. What was funny was when I asked some guys I knew who lived in Cairo, Egypt and not Cairo, Indiana where we're going to be in 4,000 years. I pointed out to them the the pyramids were built 4,000 years ago so. They hadn't ever thought about that.


?????

Matter is a form of stored energy.

If you count potential energy due to gravity as negative, that is the notional point of the top of the universe's gravity well being zero, then there is a sum total of zero energy in the universe apart from the energy required to make space time.



...It is possible that you gave people a brain cramp with your reply. With what you say then E = hv. This then could describe dark matter as being
KE = Ke - (E = hv). Just not sure if they're ready for it.


Er...............

Potential energy due to gravity (change) is equal to mgh, in my schooling.

h being height

m mass

g gravity.

What is h and v in yours? And what is the difference between KE and Ke????



...I was considering how dark matter might be quantified. While it's acknowledged to exist and exert force it essentially has no value associated with it. Yet for it to influence the spin of a galaxy it would need to have KE of it's own. Otherwise spiral galaxies wouldn't form, right ? So what I posted isn't something that you're considering.


As far as it is understood, dark matter is stuff with mass but no interaction with "normal" matter, so no strong or weak subatomic forces, no electrical or magnetic properties. So it is floating mass with no other characteristics. Thus yes it will have KE and PE in the normal way. Just does not stop when it passes through a planet and flies out the other side.

Then it is not mass.


Is mass but nothing else.

Not the sort of matter we are used to.


Really?? Have you ever been able to detect any?? How are you able to describe the characteristics of this 'mass'?


Yes it has been detected by the way it causes the galaxies to rotate and exist at all with its' gravity.

Beyond that we have no clue about it as it does not seem to interact in the way "normal" matter does.
23-09-2018 16:55
James___
★★★☆☆
(736)
Tim the plumber wrote:

Yes it has been detected by the way it causes the galaxies to rotate and exist at all with its' gravity.

Beyond that we have no clue about it as it does not seem to interact in the way "normal" matter does.



...If you had a field of minuscule particles, possibly smaller than a photon, if they conserved energy (https://www.khanacademy.org/science/physics/work-and-energy/work-and-energy-tutorial/a/what-is-conservation-of-energy) how would they be detected ? When Einstein was 17 he asked himself a question, what propagates the motion of light ? I've read Einstein's autobiography. Is it possible that the only reason dark matter shows itself is when it interacts with the gravitational field of matter is because matter might be moving through it the way fish move through water ?
23-09-2018 18:33
Into the Night
★★★★★
(5875)
Tim the plumber wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Really?? Have you ever been able to detect any?? How are you able to describe the characteristics of this 'mass'?


Yes it has been detected by the way it causes the galaxies to rotate and exist at all with its' gravity.

Galaxies do not require any mysterious 'dark matter' to exist and begin rotating. Mutual gravity between normal bits of mass are all that is necessary. That is not detection. That is a unfalsifiable theory.
Tim the plumber wrote:
Beyond that we have no clue about it as it does not seem to interact in the way "normal" matter does.

I don't think you have a clue. You are making up this fanciful material to sound important, or listening to someone that has already done so.


The Parrot Killer
Edited on 23-09-2018 18:35
23-09-2018 18:38
Into the Night
★★★★★
(5875)
James___ wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:

Yes it has been detected by the way it causes the galaxies to rotate and exist at all with its' gravity.

Beyond that we have no clue about it as it does not seem to interact in the way "normal" matter does.



...If you had a field of minuscule particles, possibly smaller than a photon, if they conserved energy (https://www.khanacademy.org/science/physics/work-and-energy/work-and-energy-tutorial/a/what-is-conservation-of-energy) how would they be detected ? When Einstein was 17 he asked himself a question, what propagates the motion of light ? I've read Einstein's autobiography. Is it possible that the only reason dark matter shows itself is when it interacts with the gravitational field of matter is because matter might be moving through it the way fish move through water ?


The Theory of the Aether has been falsified, dude. You should read up on Maxwell. Einstein's question has been answered already.


The Parrot Killer
Edited on 23-09-2018 18:39
04-10-2018 10:51
AK_User
☆☆☆☆☆
(25)
James___ wrote:
..@All,
..The Holy Link is to an image that shows how CO2 is related to ice ages. There are 3 black lines. The first is by the warming at the end of the last ice age. The other 2 are ate 110,000 and 220,000 years ago which were the end of the warm periods.
...It is supposed to demonstrate that CO2 levels and global temperatures parallel each other. The graph clearly shows that our planet was cooling down while CO2 levels stayed elevated.
..And even with this current warming period it seems that CO2 levels kept elevating while the temperature has lagged behind.

https://photos.app.goo.gl/XnHPcJ72Unu7eeAn9

We are currently in an ice-age. There have only been five ice-ages in the last 700 million years, and we are currently 2.58 million years into the fifth ice-age.

An ice-age is defined when the mean surface temperature of the planet drops by between 8°C and 10°C. The normal mean surface temperature of the planet is 22°C ± 1°C. The current mean surface temperature of the planet is 14.8°C.

Each ice-age is broken into long periods of glaciation and short interglacial periods. We are currently 11,700 years into the Holocene Interglacial Period. Interglacial periods can range from as short as 5,000 years to as long as 25,000 years, but they are always followed by another very long period (100,000 years or more) of glaciation when between 20% and 30% of the planet is covered in ice.

The last interglacial period was called the Eocene Interglacial Period and it occurred between 130,000 and 115,000 years ago.
Edited on 04-10-2018 10:54
05-10-2018 17:00
Into the Night
★★★★★
(5875)
AK_User wrote:
James___ wrote:
..@All,
..The Holy Link is to an image that shows how CO2 is related to ice ages. There are 3 black lines. The first is by the warming at the end of the last ice age. The other 2 are ate 110,000 and 220,000 years ago which were the end of the warm periods.
...It is supposed to demonstrate that CO2 levels and global temperatures parallel each other. The graph clearly shows that our planet was cooling down while CO2 levels stayed elevated.
..And even with this current warming period it seems that CO2 levels kept elevating while the temperature has lagged behind.

https://photos.app.goo.gl/XnHPcJ72Unu7eeAn9

We are currently in an ice-age. There have only been five ice-ages in the last 700 million years, and we are currently 2.58 million years into the fifth ice-age.

An ice-age is defined when the mean surface temperature of the planet drops by between 8°C and 10°C. The normal mean surface temperature of the planet is 22°C ± 1°C. The current mean surface temperature of the planet is 14.8°C.

Each ice-age is broken into long periods of glaciation and short interglacial periods. We are currently 11,700 years into the Holocene Interglacial Period. Interglacial periods can range from as short as 5,000 years to as long as 25,000 years, but they are always followed by another very long period (100,000 years or more) of glaciation when between 20% and 30% of the planet is covered in ice.

The last interglacial period was called the Eocene Interglacial Period and it occurred between 130,000 and 115,000 years ago.


It's not possible to measure the temperature of the Earth, or even to determine what the 'normal' temperature would be.


The Parrot Killer
06-10-2018 04:46
AK_User
☆☆☆☆☆
(25)
James___ wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:

Yes it has been detected by the way it causes the galaxies to rotate and exist at all with its' gravity.

Beyond that we have no clue about it as it does not seem to interact in the way "normal" matter does.



...If you had a field of minuscule particles, possibly smaller than a photon, if they conserved energy (https://www.khanacademy.org/science/physics/work-and-energy/work-and-energy-tutorial/a/what-is-conservation-of-energy) how would they be detected ? When Einstein was 17 he asked himself a question, what propagates the motion of light ? I've read Einstein's autobiography. Is it possible that the only reason dark matter shows itself is when it interacts with the gravitational field of matter is because matter might be moving through it the way fish move through water ?


Tim the plumber is correct.

Dark matter does exist, we just don't know what it is. Not only do the galaxies rotate too fast for their visible mass, but there is so much of this invisible matter that its mass causes light to bend.

We know it has significant mass. It can be measured. We just don't know what it is that has sufficient mass to function as a gravitational lens, keep galaxies rotating as fast as they are, and not interact with light. So they just slapped the label "Dark Matter" on it. It was first identified in the 1930s. Fritz Zwicky, the CalTech astronomer who made the discovery in 1933, called it "missing matter." Nobody took it seriously until the 1970s. We've been trying to figure it out since the 1970s, without much success.

We can measure Dark Matter so accurately today that they have made maps of where it is located. Dark Matter is what creates the largest structure in the universe, the Cosmic Web.

https://www.sciencealert.com/this-is-the-most-detailed-map-yet-of-the-universe-s-dark-matter
Edited on 06-10-2018 05:01
06-10-2018 06:06
Into the Night
★★★★★
(5875)
AK_User wrote:
James___ wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:

Yes it has been detected by the way it causes the galaxies to rotate and exist at all with its' gravity.

Beyond that we have no clue about it as it does not seem to interact in the way "normal" matter does.



...If you had a field of minuscule particles, possibly smaller than a photon, if they conserved energy (https://www.khanacademy.org/science/physics/work-and-energy/work-and-energy-tutorial/a/what-is-conservation-of-energy) how would they be detected ? When Einstein was 17 he asked himself a question, what propagates the motion of light ? I've read Einstein's autobiography. Is it possible that the only reason dark matter shows itself is when it interacts with the gravitational field of matter is because matter might be moving through it the way fish move through water ?


Tim the plumber is correct.

No, he is not.
AK_User wrote:
Dark matter does exist, we just don't know what it is.
True.
AK_User wrote:
Not only do the galaxies rotate too fast for their visible mass, but there is so much of this invisible matter that its mass causes light to bend.
True.
AK_User wrote:
We know it has significant mass. It can be measured. We just don't know what it is that has sufficient mass to function as a gravitational lens, keep galaxies rotating as fast as they are, and not interact with light.
It does interact with light (like any matter), but it's too dark for us to see it with our current instruments.
AK_User wrote:
So they just slapped the label "Dark Matter" on it.

Which I think is a good name for it. It is simply the stuff out there that is not glowing enough to be detectable by our instruments.
AK_User wrote:
It was first identified in the 1930s. Fritz Zwicky, the CalTech astronomer who made the discovery in 1933, called it "missing matter." Nobody took it seriously until the 1970s. We've been trying to figure it out since the 1970s, without much success.

Since it's so hard to see, that's not surprising.
AK_User wrote:
We can measure Dark Matter so accurately today that they have made maps of where it is located. Dark Matter is what creates the largest structure in the universe, the Cosmic Web.

Possibly. We really don't know for sure.


The Parrot Killer
06-10-2018 11:47
Tim the plumber
★★★★☆
(1250)
AK_User wrote:
James___ wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:

Yes it has been detected by the way it causes the galaxies to rotate and exist at all with its' gravity.

Beyond that we have no clue about it as it does not seem to interact in the way "normal" matter does.



...If you had a field of minuscule particles, possibly smaller than a photon, if they conserved energy (https://www.khanacademy.org/science/physics/work-and-energy/work-and-energy-tutorial/a/what-is-conservation-of-energy) how would they be detected ? When Einstein was 17 he asked himself a question, what propagates the motion of light ? I've read Einstein's autobiography. Is it possible that the only reason dark matter shows itself is when it interacts with the gravitational field of matter is because matter might be moving through it the way fish move through water ?


Tim the plumber is correct.

Dark matter does exist, we just don't know what it is. Not only do the galaxies rotate too fast for their visible mass, but there is so much of this invisible matter that its mass causes light to bend.

We know it has significant mass. It can be measured. We just don't know what it is that has sufficient mass to function as a gravitational lens, keep galaxies rotating as fast as they are, and not interact with light. So they just slapped the label "Dark Matter" on it. It was first identified in the 1930s. Fritz Zwicky, the CalTech astronomer who made the discovery in 1933, called it "missing matter." Nobody took it seriously until the 1970s. We've been trying to figure it out since the 1970s, without much success.

We can measure Dark Matter so accurately today that they have made maps of where it is located. Dark Matter is what creates the largest structure in the universe, the Cosmic Web.

https://www.sciencealert.com/this-is-the-most-detailed-map-yet-of-the-universe-s-dark-matter


You will find that ITN will defy any attempt to actually engage with the real world at all.

He is, as far as I can see, just a Troll who dedicates himself to untruth. Others here are on a spectrum of thinking ability. Very occasionally we get a decent one.

Welcome to the no holes barred forum.
06-10-2018 18:37
Into the Night
★★★★★
(5875)
Tim the plumber wrote:
AK_User wrote:
James___ wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:

Yes it has been detected by the way it causes the galaxies to rotate and exist at all with its' gravity.

Beyond that we have no clue about it as it does not seem to interact in the way "normal" matter does.



...If you had a field of minuscule particles, possibly smaller than a photon, if they conserved energy (https://www.khanacademy.org/science/physics/work-and-energy/work-and-energy-tutorial/a/what-is-conservation-of-energy) how would they be detected ? When Einstein was 17 he asked himself a question, what propagates the motion of light ? I've read Einstein's autobiography. Is it possible that the only reason dark matter shows itself is when it interacts with the gravitational field of matter is because matter might be moving through it the way fish move through water ?


Tim the plumber is correct.

Dark matter does exist, we just don't know what it is. Not only do the galaxies rotate too fast for their visible mass, but there is so much of this invisible matter that its mass causes light to bend.

We know it has significant mass. It can be measured. We just don't know what it is that has sufficient mass to function as a gravitational lens, keep galaxies rotating as fast as they are, and not interact with light. So they just slapped the label "Dark Matter" on it. It was first identified in the 1930s. Fritz Zwicky, the CalTech astronomer who made the discovery in 1933, called it "missing matter." Nobody took it seriously until the 1970s. We've been trying to figure it out since the 1970s, without much success.

We can measure Dark Matter so accurately today that they have made maps of where it is located. Dark Matter is what creates the largest structure in the universe, the Cosmic Web.

https://www.sciencealert.com/this-is-the-most-detailed-map-yet-of-the-universe-s-dark-matter


You will find that ITN will defy any attempt to actually engage with the real world at all.

He is, as far as I can see, just a Troll who dedicates himself to untruth. Others here are on a spectrum of thinking ability. Very occasionally we get a decent one.

Welcome to the no holes barred forum.


Bulverism fallacy.
You can't even define what 'real' is.


The Parrot Killer




Join the debate The Sun II:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
The Sun3006-10-2018 05:49
Red Sun Images in England323-10-2017 18:54
ITS THE SUN, STUPID3306-09-2016 02:45
CO2 makes Earth much cooler than the Moon because it blocks the Sun's IR1610-02-2016 12:50
CO2 blocks the Sun's incoming short wave and blocks Earth's outgoing long wave, so increasing it1208-01-2016 14:32
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Who is leading the renewable energy race?

US

EU

China

Japan

India

Brazil

Other

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2017 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact